Escobar writes: "Just like Lazarus, there were reasons to believe the Afghan
peace process might have stood a chance of being resurrected this past
Monday in Islamabad, as four major players - Afghanistan, Pakistan, the US
and China - sat together at the same table."
Afghanistan. (photo: Shutterstock)
The Afghan Puzzle
By Pepe Escobar, Counter Punch
17 January 16
Just like Lazarus, there were reasons to believe the Afghan peace process
might have stood a chance of being resurrected this past Monday in
Islamabad, as four major players Afghanistan, Pakistan, the US and China
sat together at the same table.
The final communiqué though was not exactly ground breaking: The
participants emphasized the immediate need for direct talks between
representatives of the Government of Afghanistan and representatives from
Taliban groups in a peace process that aims to preserve Afghanistans unity,
sovereignty and territorial integrity.
A week before the Islamabad meeting, while in the Persian Gulf, I had an
extremely enlightening conversation with a group of Afghan Pashtuns. After
the ice was broken, and it was established I was not some Sean Penn-style
shadowy asset with a dodgy agenda, my Pashtun interlocutors did deliver the
goods. I felt I was back in Peshawar in 2001, only a few days before 9/11.
The first groundbreaker was that two Taliban officials, currently based in
Qatar, are about to meet top Chinese and Pakistani envoys face to face,
without interference from the US. This fits into the strategy laid out by
the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), led by China and Russia,
according to which the Afghan puzzle must be solved as an Asian matter. And
Beijing definitely wants a solution, fast; think Afghan chapter of the New
Silk Roads.
The post 9/11 Afghan War has been going on for an interminable 14 years;
taking a cue from Pentagonese, talk about Enduring Freedom forever. No one
is winning and the Taliban are more divided than ever after the previous
peace process collapsed when the Taliban announced Mullah Omar had been dead
for two years.
That good old strategic depth
Still, it all hinges on the complex interplay between Kabul and Islamabad.
Take the see saw of Afghan CEO (yes, thats his title) Dr. Abdullah
Abdullah. He juggles between Tehran where he emphasizes terrorism is a
threat both to Iran and Afghanistan and Islamabad, where he discusses
peace process arcana with Pakistani officials.
Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, for his part, never skips a beat
renewing his commitment towards peace and economic development in
Afghanistan.
When an attempt towards a peace process actually started informally in
Doha, in 2012, including eight Taliban officials, the Taliban were furious
that Kabul actually privileged talking to Islamabad. The official Taliban
position is that they are politically and militarily independent from
Islamabad.
As my Pashtun interlocutors emphasized, most people in Afghanistan dont
know what to make of all that Kabul-Islamabad talk, including what they
regard as dangerous concessions, such as sending young Afghan military to be
trained in Pakistan.
Islamabad plays a highly leveraged game. The Haqqani group which
Washington brand as terrorists finds safe harbor inside Pakistans tribal
areas. If the Taliban will be on the table at any peace process that will be
brokered by Pakistan which still enjoys a lot of leverage over those
Taliban clustered around the new leader, Mullah Akhtar Mansoor.
My Pashtun interlocutors are adamant; the Taliban and the ISI remain
indistinguishable. Their strategic alliance is still in place. All Taliban
in Doha are monitored by the ISI.
On the other hand, there seems to be a subtle shift involving the Pakistani
military and the ISI (which knows everything there is to know, and is
complicit on much that happens concerning the Taliban). Last month,
Pakistans army chief Gen. Raheel Sharif went to Afghanistan by himself; so
that could mean the military will privilege real peace on the ground instead
of manipulating Afghanistan as a strategic depth Pakistani pawn.
Caution: pipeline ahead
So, in principle, the Afghan talkfest will remain in effect. The
Hezb-i-Islami Afghanistan (HIA), led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar another key
player on Washingtons Top Ten Terrorist List is also interested in the
peace process. But HIA says it must be Afghan-led and Afghan-owned meaning
no Pakistani interference. Hekmatyar is clearly positioning himself for a
future leading role.
The plot thickens when we turn from the Taliban to ISIS/ISIL/Daeshs
advances in Afghanistan. For circles close to former President Hamid Karzai,
a.k.a. the former mayor of Kabul (because he controlled nothing else),
Daesh is a creation of Islamabads foreign policy, so Pakistan may gain full
access to energy-rich Central Asia, China and Russia.
That sounds a bit far-fetched when compared to whats actually going on in
Pipelineistan.
Kabul has committed to a huge 7,000-member security force to guard the
$10-billion, 1,800 km long Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI)
gas pipeline within Afghanistan, assuming it will really be finished by
December 2018. Optimistically, heavy work on clearing TAPIs passage and
that includes demining will begin in April.
Turkmenistan President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov already
ordered state companies Turkmengaz and Turkmengazneftstroi to begin building
the countrys 214-km section of TAPI. The pipeline will also travel 773 km
in Afghanistan and 827 km in Pakistan before entering India. Whether all
this frenzy will actually materialize by 2018 is open to never-ending
question.
Wheres my heroin?
Meanwhile, what is the CIA up to?
Former acting CIA director Michael Morell is now spinning the reemergence
of Afghanistan as an issue, so the debate on how many troops we [the US]
keep in Afghanistan is going to reopen.
The Pentagon for its part is spinning the need for 10,000 boots on the
ground. The top NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John Campbell, wants his
10,000 with a vengeance; My intent would be to keep as much as I could, for
as long as I could. Enduring Freedom forever, indeed as the Pentagon has
been forced to admit, on the record, that the Afghan security forces are
incapable of operating entirely on their own despite a whopping Washington
investment of $60 billion-plus since 2002.
The latest Pentagon reports describe security in Afghanistan going down,
down, down. Which brings us to Helmand.
Only a few days before the Islamabad meeting, US special forces shadowing
Afghan troops got into a tremendous firefight with the Taliban in Helmand.
Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook, in trademark newspeak, didnt call it
combat but a train, advise and assist mission.
The Taliban control more territory in Afghanistan than at any time since the
2001 American bombing. The Taliban control no less than four Helmand
districts. Civilians are caught in the crossfire. And yet Pentagon special
forces and air strikes in Helmand are just qualified as sightseeing.
In the end, everything comes back to Helmand. Why Helmand? My Pashtun
interlocutors loosen up and say it with a mouthful: its all about the
involvement of the CIA in the heroin trade in Afghanistan; The Americans
simply cant let it go.
So here we are delving into perhaps a new chapter in a gas and poppy epic at
the heart of Eurasia. The Taliban, divided or not, have come up with their
ultimate red line; no talking with Kabul until they get a direct talk with
Washington. From a Taliban point of view, it makes total sense.
Pipelineistan? Fine, but we want our cut (thats the same story since the
first Clinton administration). CIA heroin? Fine, you can keep it, but we
want our cut.
My Pashtun interlocutors, about to board a flight to Peshawar, lay out the
road map. The Taliban want their Qatar office a really nice palace
officially recognized as a representation of the Islamic Emirate of
Afghanistan; thats what the country was from 1996 to 2001. They want the UN
not to mention the US to remove the Taliban from its most wanted list.
They want all Taliban prisoners released from Afghan jails.
Will that happen? Of course not. So its up to Beijing to come up with a
win-win scenario.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Afghanistan. (photo: Shutterstock)
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/15/the-afghan-puzzle/http://www.counterp
unch.org/2016/01/15/the-afghan-puzzle/
The Afghan Puzzle
By Pepe Escobar, Counter Punch
17 January 16
ust like Lazarus, there were reasons to believe the Afghan peace process
might have stood a chance of being resurrected this past Monday in
Islamabad, as four major players Afghanistan, Pakistan, the US and China
sat together at the same table.
The final communiqué though was not exactly ground breaking: The
participants emphasized the immediate need for direct talks between
representatives of the Government of Afghanistan and representatives from
Taliban groups in a peace process that aims to preserve Afghanistans unity,
sovereignty and territorial integrity.
A week before the Islamabad meeting, while in the Persian Gulf, I had an
extremely enlightening conversation with a group of Afghan Pashtuns. After
the ice was broken, and it was established I was not some Sean Penn-style
shadowy asset with a dodgy agenda, my Pashtun interlocutors did deliver the
goods. I felt I was back in Peshawar in 2001, only a few days before 9/11.
The first groundbreaker was that two Taliban officials, currently based in
Qatar, are about to meet top Chinese and Pakistani envoys face to face,
without interference from the US. This fits into the strategy laid out by
the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), led by China and Russia,
according to which the Afghan puzzle must be solved as an Asian matter. And
Beijing definitely wants a solution, fast; think Afghan chapter of the New
Silk Roads.
The post 9/11 Afghan War has been going on for an interminable 14 years;
taking a cue from Pentagonese, talk about Enduring Freedom forever. No one
is winning and the Taliban are more divided than ever after the previous
peace process collapsed when the Taliban announced Mullah Omar had been dead
for two years.
That good old strategic depth
Still, it all hinges on the complex interplay between Kabul and Islamabad.
Take the see saw of Afghan CEO (yes, thats his title) Dr. Abdullah
Abdullah. He juggles between Tehran where he emphasizes terrorism is a
threat both to Iran and Afghanistan and Islamabad, where he discusses
peace process arcana with Pakistani officials.
Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, for his part, never skips a beat
renewing his commitment towards peace and economic development in
Afghanistan.
When an attempt towards a peace process actually started informally in
Doha, in 2012, including eight Taliban officials, the Taliban were furious
that Kabul actually privileged talking to Islamabad. The official Taliban
position is that they are politically and militarily independent from
Islamabad.
As my Pashtun interlocutors emphasized, most people in Afghanistan dont
know what to make of all that Kabul-Islamabad talk, including what they
regard as dangerous concessions, such as sending young Afghan military to be
trained in Pakistan.
Islamabad plays a highly leveraged game. The Haqqani group which
Washington brand as terrorists finds safe harbor inside Pakistans tribal
areas. If the Taliban will be on the table at any peace process that will be
brokered by Pakistan which still enjoys a lot of leverage over those
Taliban clustered around the new leader, Mullah Akhtar Mansoor.
My Pashtun interlocutors are adamant; the Taliban and the ISI remain
indistinguishable. Their strategic alliance is still in place. All Taliban
in Doha are monitored by the ISI.
On the other hand, there seems to be a subtle shift involving the Pakistani
military and the ISI (which knows everything there is to know, and is
complicit on much that happens concerning the Taliban). Last month,
Pakistans army chief Gen. Raheel Sharif went to Afghanistan by himself; so
that could mean the military will privilege real peace on the ground instead
of manipulating Afghanistan as a strategic depth Pakistani pawn.
Caution: pipeline ahead
So, in principle, the Afghan talkfest will remain in effect. The
Hezb-i-Islami Afghanistan (HIA), led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar another key
player on Washingtons Top Ten Terrorist List is also interested in the
peace process. But HIA says it must be Afghan-led and Afghan-owned meaning
no Pakistani interference. Hekmatyar is clearly positioning himself for a
future leading role.
The plot thickens when we turn from the Taliban to ISIS/ISIL/Daeshs
advances in Afghanistan. For circles close to former President Hamid Karzai,
a.k.a. the former mayor of Kabul (because he controlled nothing else),
Daesh is a creation of Islamabads foreign policy, so Pakistan may gain full
access to energy-rich Central Asia, China and Russia.
That sounds a bit far-fetched when compared to whats actually going on in
Pipelineistan.
Kabul has committed to a huge 7,000-member security force to guard the
$10-billion, 1,800 km long Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI)
gas pipeline within Afghanistan, assuming it will really be finished by
December 2018. Optimistically, heavy work on clearing TAPIs passage and
that includes demining will begin in April.
Turkmenistan President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov already
ordered state companies Turkmengaz and Turkmengazneftstroi to begin building
the countrys 214-km section of TAPI. The pipeline will also travel 773 km
in Afghanistan and 827 km in Pakistan before entering India. Whether all
this frenzy will actually materialize by 2018 is open to never-ending
question.
Wheres my heroin?
Meanwhile, what is the CIA up to?
Former acting CIA director Michael Morell is now spinning the reemergence
of Afghanistan as an issue, so the debate on how many troops we [the US]
keep in Afghanistan is going to reopen.
The Pentagon for its part is spinning the need for 10,000 boots on the
ground. The top NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. John Campbell, wants his
10,000 with a vengeance; My intent would be to keep as much as I could, for
as long as I could. Enduring Freedom forever, indeed as the Pentagon has
been forced to admit, on the record, that the Afghan security forces are
incapable of operating entirely on their own despite a whopping Washington
investment of $60 billion-plus since 2002.
The latest Pentagon reports describe security in Afghanistan going down,
down, down. Which brings us to Helmand.
Only a few days before the Islamabad meeting, US special forces shadowing
Afghan troops got into a tremendous firefight with the Taliban in Helmand.
Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook, in trademark newspeak, didnt call it
combat but a train, advise and assist mission.
The Taliban control more territory in Afghanistan than at any time since the
2001 American bombing. The Taliban control no less than four Helmand
districts. Civilians are caught in the crossfire. And yet Pentagon special
forces and air strikes in Helmand are just qualified as sightseeing.
In the end, everything comes back to Helmand. Why Helmand? My Pashtun
interlocutors loosen up and say it with a mouthful: its all about the
involvement of the CIA in the heroin trade in Afghanistan; The Americans
simply cant let it go.
So here we are delving into perhaps a new chapter in a gas and poppy epic at
the heart of Eurasia. The Taliban, divided or not, have come up with their
ultimate red line; no talking with Kabul until they get a direct talk with
Washington. From a Taliban point of view, it makes total sense.
Pipelineistan? Fine, but we want our cut (thats the same story since the
first Clinton administration). CIA heroin? Fine, you can keep it, but we
want our cut.
My Pashtun interlocutors, about to board a flight to Peshawar, lay out the
road map. The Taliban want their Qatar office a really nice palace
officially recognized as a representation of the Islamic Emirate of
Afghanistan; thats what the country was from 1996 to 2001. They want the UN
not to mention the US to remove the Taliban from its most wanted list.
They want all Taliban prisoners released from Afghan jails.
Will that happen? Of course not. So its up to Beijing to come up with a
win-win scenario.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
